Mumbai ITAT rules income from sale and subscription of journals not basis to deny exemption u/s 11 if not main objects of trust in ITO vs Satvichar Darshan case. Detailed analysis provided.
ITAT Mumbai held that as under distribution segment assessee is purchasing Finished Drug Formulation from its AE for sale in India and under manufacturing segment assessee is transacting with non-AEs, it is fair and reasonable to segregated contract of manufacturing activity and distribution activity. Accordingly, matter remanded.
Explore the Mumbai ITAT’s ruling on disallowing contributions to Provident Fund and ESIC if not deposited within due dates, impacting C. Doctor & Co. Pvt. Ltd.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessment order passed without satisfying mandatory provisions of section 92CA and CBDT instruction no. 3 of 2016 is order falling within the meaning of erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act rightly invoked.
ITAT Mumbai held that assessee selecting Associated Enterprise (AE) as “tested party” justifiable. Accordingly, transfer pricing study conducted by the assessee is duly acceptable.
ITAT Mumbai held that there is a fundamental gap between guarantee and Letter of Comfort. Guarantee is a legally enforceable; however, Letter of Comfort is not. Thus, issuing Letter of Comfort to the Bankers of AE, the assessee did not incurred any cost and hence it does not constitute international transaction under section 92B of the Act
ITAT Mumbai held that denial of exemption under section 54 of the Income Tax Act unjustified as appellant cannot be penalized for the mistake committed by the developer/seller in allocating the flat. Thus, exemption u/s. 54 granted as all the conditions satisfied.
Mumbai ITAT ruling in Canara Bank vs. ACIT case clarifies TDS liability when taxpayer unaware of subsequent TDS certificate. Detailed analysis & implications.
ITAT Mumbai held that business restructuring entered into by an enterprise with its associated enterprise for eliminating duplicate corporate procedures falls within the ambit of “international transaction” as defined in section 92B of the Income Tax Act.
Read about the ITAT Mumbai ruling in Inderjit Singh Manchanda vs. CIT case, where the application for condonation of delay regarding penalty proceedings appeal was dismissed.
